Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD BENCH
R.V. Ghuge, J.
Shankar Ranuji Kanwade and Ors. – Appellant
Vs.
Bhausaheb Dagadu Ambre and Ors. – Respondent
W.P. No. 1222 of 1992
Decided On: 18.12.2014
Widow - Tenancy Dispute - Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Section 32-G, Section 32-F, Section 32-G - The court discussed the legal provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, particularly sections 32-G, 32-F, and 32-G, and their interpretations. The court emphasized the rights of widows and tenants, the process of determining the purchase price of land, and the rights of legal heirs in tenancy disputes.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased Shankar was the adopted son of deceased Reubai, the owner of ancestral property. A dispute arose regarding the tenancy of the suit land, leading to civil proceedings and tenancy references. The court held Shankar as the legal heir and sole owner of the suit land, while the respondents claimed rights as legal heirs of Dagadu, the deceased son-in-law of Reubai.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the legal heirs of Dagadu had the right to purchase the suit property under section 32-G of the Bombay Tenancy Act. It also concluded that the tenancy issue was settled in favor of Dagadu, rendering him a deemed purchaser of the land. The court upheld the rights of widows and tenants under the Act.
Issues: The issues included the determination of legal heirs' rights to purchase the suit property, the validity of the tenancy created by Reubai, and the compliance with the statutory provisions regarding the exercise of the right to purchase the land.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the rights of widows and tenants under the Bombay Tenancy Act, particularly sections 32-G and 32-F, and the process of determining the purchase price of the land. It also highlighted the importance of compliance with statutory provisions for exercising the right to purchase the land.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, upholding the impugned judgment of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal and the possession of the land was directed to be handed over to the legal heirs of Dagadu.
R.V. Ghuge, J.
1. By order dated 26-6-1992, this Court heard the matter and issued Rule. The contentions of the petitioners can be summarized as under:--
(a) The deceased Shankar (original petitioner) was the adopted son of deceased Reubai who was owner of the suit land bearing Survey No. 32 having area 3.86 acres, Survey No. 32 having area 2.57 acres, Survey No. 34/4 having area of 2.41 acres, Survey No. 35/2 having area of 5.23 acres and Survey No. 64 having area of 1.26 acres.
(b) The total area is admeasuring 15.33 acres situated in village Lingdev Tq. Akole, District: Ahmednagar is said to be the ancestral property of the petitioner.
(c) The original landlord Kushaba had two sons Viz. Nagu and Ranu.
(d) Both Nagu and Ranu have died prior to 1932.
(e) Anabai was the widow of Nagu and after his death she was his sole legal heir.
(f) The deceased Ranu left behind three daughters Viz. Housabai, Thamabai and Mamtabai.
(g) Dagdu was the husband of Housabai and son in law of Reubai.
(h) Dagdu died in 1962.
(i) The deceased Dagdu and Housabai had a son viz. Bhausaheb and three daughters.
(j) Reubai died on 6-1-1964 and Shankar Ranuji Kanawade (minor) became her legal heir as an adopted son.
(k) Taking undue advantage of Reubai's ignorance and being a widow, Dagdu succeeded in getting his name recorded as a tenant in respect of suit land.
(l) Later on he became the deemed purchaser of the suit land as per section 32-G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (Tenancy Act hereinafter).
(m) The deceased Shankar Ranoji had therefore filed Civil Suit bearing No. 33/60 on 25-6-1960 in the Civil Court which made a reference regarding tenancy to the Tenancy Court.
(n) The Civil Court held Shankar as being the legal heir since he was the adopted son of Reubai.
(o) Dagdu's heirs preferred an appeal for challenging the conclusion of the Civil Court.
(p) The Judgment and decree of the Civil Court was confirmed in appeal.
(q) Dagadu was never the tenant of the suit land and could not have claimed tenancy being the son-in-law of Reubai and brother in law of Shankar.
(r) The suit lands were grass lands and the provisions of Tenancy Act were not applicable.
(s) Since Reubai was a widow, the tillers day 1-4-1957 would stand postponed.
(t) In the tenancy reference made by the Civil Court, arising out of Shankar's suit, the Tahsildar sent back the reference since the issue as to whether adopted son Shankar was the absolute owner of the suit land had cropped up.
(u) The Civil Court had thus held that Shankar had become sole owner of the suit land and therefore, the deceased Dagdu and his heirs had no legal right to purchase the said lands under section 32-G of the Tenancy Act.
(v) The deceased Shankar had therefore preferred an appeal before the Additional Tahsildar bearing No. TNC Case No. 1/97 Lingdev 32-P.
(w) After due enquiry, it was concluded on 25-7-1983 that the possession of the suit land be given to Shankar and the respondents herein be evicted.
(x) The respondents challenged the order of the Additional Tahsildar dated 25-7-1983 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Sangamner division, Sangamner bearing Tenancy Appeal No. 56/1983.
(y) The S.D.O. Sangamner dismissed the appeal of the respondents and confirmed the judgment and order of the lower Court vide his judgment dated 11-10-1989.
(z) The respondents preferred a revision before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal Pune bearing No. MRT/AH/X/7/1989 (TNC-13-282-89).
(aa) The MRT by its Judgment and order dated 4-3-1991 allowed the revision of the respondents.
(bb) Since Reubai was a widow before the introduction of the Tenancy Act, the tiller's day 1-4-1957 shall be deemed to be postponed during the lifetime of the widow.
(cc) Till the death of Reubai, no tenant can initiate proceedings for purchasing the land.
(dd) During the lifetime of the widow and till her death, no tenant can be a deemed purchaser.
(ee) Within one year from the date of her death, her successor can resume the land for personal cultiv
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
